You could trace it back a little further though.  Breathing in Victorian era London was pretty unpleasant.





RE

If we try and go back too far we defeat our purpose.

Doom is a fact of life.  No matter how far back we go we find doom.  So why have the Doomstead if doom is just a fact of life!?

Because the kind of doom we concern ourselves with here has human roots.  Climate change, resource depletion. These are problems that humans caused themselves.  Doom as the result of human action or INACTION is our primary concern, though decent material concerning doom in general is welcome.

Breathing in Victorian era London was pretty unpleasant. certainly qualifies as human caused.

QuoteAs soon as I escaped from the oppressive atmosphere of the city, and from that awful odour of reeking kitchens which, when in use, pour forth a ruinous mess of steam and soot, I perceived at once that my health was mending... So I am my old self again, feeling now no wavering languor in my system, and no sluggishness in my brain.

Seneca AD 64-65

The point being to save as many as you can.

Quote from: Tonyprep on Aug 01, 2023, 03:30 PMAll species degrade the environment

That is a very specious argument.  All living things use energy to grow and they create waste in the process, but the waste product of one life form provides the energy and or building blocks for another.  Worms digest human waste, worm shit feeds plants, the waste product of photosynthesis is free oxygen which serves as the electron reciver for the krebs cycle which produces ATP which provides chemical energy for animals...round and round she goes.  It's a constant dissipative cycle that runs as long as the sun keeps providing the right amount of energy for the system to run, not too much or too little.

Homo Sap fit right in to this whole system quite well until we learned to control fire and began consuming copious amounts of energy faster than the sun regenerated it.  First we burned whole forests, then we moved on to the fossil fuels.  That was when the degradation began.

RE

QuoteAll species degrade the environment

I don't mean to pick on you Tony P.  But I have to say that I learned that is not true last week.  I have been into You-Tubes about the ancient past. 

I learned some things about insect evolution.

Before insects decay could not keep up with plant growth, and the world swung between snowball earths when ice miles thick covered all land and when land was all backing desert.  No decay meant CO2 was depleted and global temperature went below freezing.  New volcanic activity then would bring new CO2,and the earth became baking desert until plants cooled things down to make a brief paradise.  But the plants could not decay. The cycle repeated.  This happened several times.

Insects burrow into plants transferring fungus and bacteria to internal plant parts by their action, greatly increasing decay.  Fungi evolved to digest lignin and insects distribute the fungi.  Enough so that the planetary system is stabilized.

QuoteSpecific lineages within the basidiomycete fungi, white rot species, have evolved the ability to break up a major structural component of woody plants, lignin.

Keeping the correct amount of CO2 in the air turns out to be a big deal.

Who coulda knowd?

Peak oil not talked about right now because everyone is distracted with other issues.

Fracking, deep water drilling and bio-fuels all are reactions to peak oil... Easy stuff is gone. No more spindle top gushers...
Now where is that cartoon I posted 3 forums and about 10 years ago?

Here it is. My favourite peak oil video still on youtube!


Fuel here is hovering around $2.10 a litre. When I started drivig it was $0.20 a litre. 10 fold in 35 years.

Peak oil is adding to inflation, and all we know how to do is print more money, adding to inflation.
The correct response is use less... But... No government will ever get elected telling people your chldren will have a lower standard of living than you, hence the cycle goes on until we fall off a clif, One of many, we are rushing towards:

Ecconomic collapse
Food shortage
Environmental collapse
Social collapse
Wars
Population collapse
IQ collapse?...


Hmm, seeing all of these right now already. Maybe we are already in free fall?

Western ecconomic society needs to grow to survive. its basd on increasing money supply. It needs cheap energy to do this. We have run out of chep energy. De-growth is the only path forward. Some call this collapse. Most think we can avoid it. We can only delay.


JOW

Arthur Berman says 2-3 years and the world is going to know that dino juice production will not keep up with demand.


And all the strings that bind together modern life begin to fray.

After the short video a much longer one with Arthur played. 



Winds of a perfect storm gather.  An energy depletion storm with monumental waves of disruption will soon break upon the world.

According to Arthur our use of fossil fuel has not decreased.  There is no green transition.  Green energy is only 5% of an increasing total.  In a few years there is going to be some serious grim-reaping going on.  The commission of excess emission continues to climb.

Jevon's paradox is understood by less than 5% of humanity.  Global heating is a narrow view of the problem.  The size of the human enterprise is simply too big, and the number of people capable of change too small.

We be doomed.  The beginning of the end.  Peak oil needs to be redefined.  The peak occurs when insufficient supplies can no longer fund the American experiment.  Then it all comes down.


It is not that Americans are special, but America is at the nexus of the house of cards.

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 24, 2024, 01:20 PMArthur Berman says 2-3 years and the world is going to know that dino juice production will not keep up with demand.

Art Berman said on video in 2011, introduced by the head of ASPO on the footsteps of the DOE Forrestal building in Washington, that there was no significant oil is US shales.

Currently the 3 shale plays in the Permian are making maybe, 5 mmbbl/d, the Eagle Ford is making 1 mmbbl/d, the Bakken is making something like 1.1-1.2 mmbbl/d, and a couple others make about 8 mmbbl/d total

Graphic with all US shale oil production here

US shales are making more oil, right now, than everyone in OPEC except Saudi Arabia. If the US could ONLY be a shale oil producer (arguably they are, call it mini-me US), it would be the 2nd largest producer in OPEC, and the 3rd largest producer on the planet. Beating out all of China, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Canada, UAE, etc etc.

What might it take in your eyes K-Dog, to disqualify the value of a petroleum geologist's opinion? Would not knowing there is...you know...OIL....in shale oil formations qualify?

And if, in fact, a petroleum geologist not knowing about oil in shale rocks isn't disqualifying at the most OMG HOW DID THAT EVER HAPPEN!!!! level, what might be?

Tell us how long the oil Bonanza will last TDOS.

Berman says new wells now only produce 2/3 of what new wells produced a few years ago.  Do you think he is lying about that?

Tell us what we are going to eat when the bonanza is over.  Arthur Berman's character which you seem to have a personal problem with, has nothing to do with the truth of what he says.  The truth of what he says is right or wrong based on objective facts.

How long will it be before a diesel truck can't deliver you Cheetos any more     ?

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 24, 2024, 04:07 PMTell us how long the oil Bonanza will last TDOS.

I only know of one internet poster, one specialist, and a few hints they have dropped on the internet a year or three back now, spotted in a few very particular places over the years, who has ever claimed such a thing...and what was amusing about that person's answer was that it was framed in exactly the context almost never brought up within the peak oil sphere.

And the answer itself was completely worthless. But what it revealed was....revolutionary.

Quote from: K-DogBerman says new wells now only produce 2/3 of what new wells produced a few years ago.  Do you think he is lying about that?

Did he say this was absolute volumes or normalized to lateral length? Which particular formations? Did he correct for changes in drilling locations as newer wells, or perhaps older ones, turned out to have been in the Tier 1 acreage, versus the other lesser acreage as the Tier 1 became depleted? Or more Tier 1 was discovered?

In terms of folks giving HINTS at having tackled the US shales in the right way, I have only proof of one gang releasing information showing they know far more than they usually let on, and you've never seen from Art in his professional career. The answer has nothing to do with if Art is correct or not, because absolute volumes aren't the metric...economic viability is.

I've used this article before as a reference for a reason. Because no one else cuts these loose. Don't know if it is because folks like Art can't, or won't, or the others that make them charge for the info because that's how valuable it is.

If these folks have done this work for all shales in the US, they have the answer to the question you just asked. But someone who doesn't know oil in US shale formations even exists? What level of getting it wrong discredits Art's opinion K-Dog? How many 2+2=5 exercises before a source discredits every word coming out of their mouths....even if you WANT to believe it?

TDOS,  when people pin you down you don't answer.  You are a cornicopian.  I asked you,  tell us how long the oil bonanza will last?

Tell us in you own words.  I will make it easier on you this time and only answer one of the questions.

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 24, 2024, 04:58 PMTDOS,  when people pin you down you don't answer.

Et Tu, Brute? I have asked more than a few of my own....and they have been avoided with alacrity. One of them this very evening on your most current reference...and I provided the information to allow you to answer as easy as I could. Of what quality is the reference you provided, in light of their track record?

Quote from: K-DogYou are a cornicopian.  I asked you,  tell us how long the oil bonanza will last?

Define "bonanza". Volume or price. And the scale of the question. Domestic or global?

And I am a doomer. Just not like one of those you defined earlier i.e. the faith based who ignore conflicting evidence, facts and even reality in order to proclaim a result they like. You explained them quite well. Being a doomer is childs play based on nothing more than perspective. All it requires is an understanding that the Sun is getting lighter every day, and the astrophysical doom that guarentees.

Quote from: K-DogTell us in you own words.  I will make it easier on you this time and only answer one of the questions.

Cool. I put it in bold last time so you wouldn't miss it. Here it is again.
What might it take in your eyes K-Dog, to disqualify the value of a petroleum geologist's opinion?

Your question was "tell us how long the oil bonanza will last?"

Give me the framework of interest and I'll give you my answer. Price or volume. And scale.

QuoteWhat might it take in your eyes K-Dog, to disqualify the value of a petroleum geologist's opinion?

If they have an advanced degree from an accredited university, quite a fucking lot.  They would have to spew nonsense that can be refuted.  Now answer my question.

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 24, 2024, 06:05 PM

QuoteWhat might it take in your eyes K-Dog, to disqualify the value of a petroleum geologist's opinion?

If they have an advanced degree from an accredited university, quite a fucking lot.

Art has a history degree from somewhere, and a geology masters from Colorado School of Mines. It is a good school. So when as a petroleum geologist, with at least some minor experience with a major, states that when shale source rock can't have any left in it of significant volume in 2011, and folks from lesser schools turn that oil from shale rock into the world's 3rd largest producing source....well...it just seems that 8 mmbbl/d is quite a fucking lot.

Quote from: K-DogThey would have to spew nonsense that can be refuted.  Now answer my question.

Good. Perfect description of Art and the example I mentioned. We can put aside his nonsense about well productivity change until he gets an engineering degree and hope he can use it better than his geology one, like geolgists that can't find 8 mmbbl/d as it is being developed under their feet can be counted on to be able to add or subtract correctly, let alone get the training to be taken seriously by those who do well prpoductivity for a living.


Happy to answer your question. You didn't provide the reference of the answer so I'll fill it in for you. Domestic. And I'll do both price and volumes.

The US is burning through that 8 mmbbl/d = 2.9 billion/yr. Currently US total production has been relatively flat this year, so I will assume first that flat will continue. Oil prices running $80/bbl or so, companies focusing on return to investors rather than growth, rig counts began dropping last spring, been stable for awhile. Flat currently is a good start.

To figure reserves you multiple 2.9 billion X (6-8) to get the approximate amount of produced oil if you stopped drilling new wells tomorrow. So call that 20 billion barrels produced over through mid-century. Figure out remaining area in each of the big oil plays and you're looking at maybe 14 million acres. Take the wells drilled, in the big oil plays anyway, call that 49,000 at 150 acres each and you discount 7.4 million of those acres. So you figure that development of slightly over half the area netted you maybe 7 billion cum, +20 of existing production from them in the future. Lets call the remaining less than that, so another 25 billion. Assuming stable production in the $55-$100/bbl range, and the same type of rampup of new wells to get to the point of replacing the 2.9 that is declining away over the next quarter century, you might be able to sustain the current rate for 10 years of buildup of new, same as the old. Seems reasonable. Presume existing prices though, and then variation becomes a acreage tier issue. You know...stuff geologists know....except for discredited ones. Higher prices have the chance to offset declines and even provide gains in exchange for lower rates later, even at the higher prices. Low prices slow the entire process down, including current rates, but extend a given rate longer. Low prices and slowdowns also have the potential to create another peak at a later point in time. I know....again...?

So the oil that Art claimed couldn't be significant and turned into the 3rd largest oil producing rock in the world (and rocketed the US to being the world's largest oil producer....again) can be sized at about 50 billion barrels, call it twice the size of Prudhoe Bay in place volumes. Just a back of envelope WAG of course.

So the US will be a substantial producer for quite some period of time, with holding oil prices, and no one changing the rules for the producers along the way, always a popular idea among the save the world types.

The bad news is this...US oil prices aren't based on US costs. They are based on international prices, storage and strategic volumes, OPEC proclamations and curtailments, and those are all about geopolitics. So those who don't know dick about oil particulars, like maybe Art, might be better off inventing cool global scenarios, the knock on effects of which can cascade all over US oil prices and the economy at large.

Quotesustain the current rate for 10 years of buildup of new, same as the old. Seems reasonable.

Ten years, then as production can not be maintained, what happens?  Ten years how much time is that.

This was the number one song of 2014.  Ten years ago.


Ten years is the blink of an eye.  After which no preparations have been made.  Peak thinking did pollute brains because the end will not resemble a gradual fading away.  Things will go to shit fast.

In ten more years the biosphere collapse will show that the human race is in overshoot beyond any doubt.

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 24, 2024, 08:40 PM

Quotesustain the current rate for 10 years of buildup of new, same as the old. Seems reasonable.

Ten years, then as production can not be maintained, what happens?  Ten years how much time is that.

Ten years was how long it took the US to begin ramping up oil from shale and become the world's largest oil producer, and repeak the country some half a century after the last time.

What happens next is called the Texas ROZ. You can't ask Art about it, he'll say the same thing he said last time. And the folks who knew he was full of shit then are busy doing the same thing all over again. The cost will require a higher base price, but the last time I noticed a volume attached to it, that number was twice as large as the one I just gave you for light tight oil from shale formations. Another 100 billion.

Let me guess, Art didn't mention that one in his video? That research stuff does come in handy on occasion. Someone should tell Art, so he can deny it doen't exist like the last time. That would be a riot in another decade.

Quote from: K-DogTen years is the blink of an eye. 

True. The US went from leftover has-been to world leading oil and gas producer and LNG exporter in about that long.

Quote from: K-DogAfter which no preparations have been made.

Says who? Maybe there are folks out there doing that thing again...research? Maybe they were talking about it 15 years ago, and Art didn't notice that either? Maybe they began experimenting with the processes for at least 8 years now? Maybe their current beef is they can't get the oil price they want? 

Quote from: K-DogPeak thinking did pollute brains because the end will not resemble a gradual fading away.  Things will go to shit fast.

Well, we know it'll take longer than 6 years, right? And can go to 15, because we've already been post peak oil that long as well. So what are you thinking? 20 maybe? Gives us another 14 then maybe?

Quote from: K-DogIn ten more years the biosphere collapse will show that the human race is in overshoot beyond any doubt.

Could be, but that doesn't require yet another peak oil involved. Humans have plenty of stuff to keep polluting the biosphere with besides just burning stuff. Plus we've got the feedback loops going now, rising oceans and whatnot.

I think sticking with biosphere pollution and climate change is a great end times angle than peak oil stuff.

Sorry to hear about all the lost forum data and whatnot. That always sucks.